It's a cliche to say that there are no winners in war, this war or any others. Plenty of losers. Bear with me, especially if this has been diaried before. But if we were losing the war for hearts and minds in Iraq, we totally abandoned the battlefield this week, with the display of Zarqawi's head by the Pentagon.
more below...
We've discussed classical ethics here before. Virtue, deontology and consquentialism were the dominant theories in western ethical thought for more than 2 millenium. Feminism brought the whole theoretical foundation to a new place, putting emphasis on relationship and context in ethical decision making.
In the last 30 years, with the exposure to the west of eastern thought by more than just academics, ethical theory has grown to include the idea of 'moral protection,' - who and/or what is entitled to have values applied to existence? Animals, the environment and all of sentient life is commonly considered to be worthy of moral protection.
Bernard Gert, possibly the best-known western ethicist, even proposed ten rules for moral behavior. More here: http://www.amazon.com/... (if you want to become an ethics geek).
The moral universe has expanded with the evolution of both our scientific understanding and capacity for compassion. We have become more evolved as humans and as a society. We have the knowledge and the capacity to make deliberate and praiseworthy moral choices.
All the more reason to lament the globally televised gilt-framing of Zarqawi's head.
The moral universe includes dignified treatment of another's body in all its condtions, even the corpse. Desecration or non-ritual display of a human corpse marks an extreme moral low-point, the type of offense that can neither be excused nor justified.
Given the Haditha killings and the "values training" issues in play,we can discuss and still never understand the decision-making that occurs in 'the heat of battle.'
However, the decision to display the face of any combatant, in death, not as part of a funeral procedding, but as a trophy, was obviously made at the highest levels.
In his life, Zarqawi's actions made him a legitimate military and journalistic target.
In death, no longer an agent of any deliberate action, his (or any other) body becomes worthy of moral protection. There is no moral high ground in displaying a corpse - there is in fact only blameworthiness in such a decision. The only right thing to do at the point of death is to carry out the official duties, which certainly include photographing the corpse and taking DNA samples. At this point, the moral course is to return the body to be disposed according to the explicit, known, or customary processes dictated by the deceased and/or their family.
So, on what could and should have been a legitimate 'good day' for everybody concerned, the Pentagon, and by the extension the US, has shown itself to be morally inferior to most societies who identify themselves as civilized.
Again, this was not the heat of battle or even the fog of war. This is a deliberate decision made by men who know that there are ethical issues involved here, and chose to ignore those ethical issues in favor of displaying a trophy.
Where we go from here is anybody's guess. But the moral darkness that must be behind whomever made that decsion is only outdone, barely, by the naked stupidity of the decision.